Point and laugh: Watch these lowlights of Democrats’ shameless filibuster hypocrisy

Guy BensonPosted at 4:41 pm on March 30, 2017

Two-and-a-half minutes of tear-your-hair-out hypocrisy from the usual suspects: Senate Democrats who were once highly enthusiastic about filibustering Bush nominees, who then lined up to abolish the practice they’d pioneered, passionately arguing that every nominee deserves an “up or down” vote — only to join a proposed filibuster to deny President Trump’s nominee…an up or down vote. This is great work by the Free Beacon’s David Rutz, showcasing painfully obvious evidence that many of these Senators are shameless, say-anything, bad-faith actors on this front. This whole spectacle is quite irritating on one level, but the double-standards at play are so ludicrous and ham-handedly executed that it’s tempting to laugh out loud at these people:

I’d like to draw special attention to three clips within this compilation: (1) Chuck Schumer’s stated “preference” for “up or down votes, and majority rule,” which he outlined way back in the ancient days of 2013, after having backed dozens of filibusters against Bush nominees. He’s now returned to stenuous opposition to the very thing he was ardently advocating as recently as a few months ago. (2) Tim Kaine, the Vice Presidential nominee on Hillary Clinton’s failed ticket, explaining that Harry Reid’s 2013 nuclear option was caused by Republican “stonewalling.” As we demonstrated yesterday at Townhall, the GOP’s alleged obstructionism at the time amounted to confirming a higher percentage of Obama nominees, at a more expedited clip, than Democrats had allowed under Bush:

Kaine also famously promised that Democrats would extend the nuclear Reid Rule to ram through President Hillary’s Supreme Court nominees. Oops. Now he’s back in favor of the filibuster in such circumstances, because of course he is. (3) President Obama decrying the “abuse” of “arcane procedural tactics to prevent well-qualified, patriotic Americans to from filling critical positions.” Senator Barack Obama joined the first-ever attempted partisan filibuster against Justice Alito in 2006. He later said he regretted the decision, acknowledging the error of his ways only after his personal incentives had completely shifted. His stance on the judicial filibuster has always aligned with his immediate political interests — a familiar pattern throughout his career. I’ll leave you with Schumer prattling on about his imaginary 60 vote threshold, which he claims is supported by the American people: